(29-02-2016 10:27 AM)morondog Wrote: Um... Alize but you guys must have noticed by now that a king descended from David is not currently ruling you? Right? Doesn't that kinda pour a bit of cold water on the whole 'eternal royal line' promise?

But we do have the Davidic line. I can point to people today who have family traditions that place them in the House of David. We accept these claims as valid until they prove otherwise. We also understand that there are going to be tons of people who are Davidic who don’t even know it.

The Hebrew bible was written as an internal document, intended for a Jewish audience. There are some cultural and religious expectations that the writers assume that readers have.

We haven’t had a sitting Davidic King for 2,500 years, and at no time did the Jews say, “Hey wait a minute….” The promise isn’t that there will be a sitting king on the throne at any given time. It’s that the line will exist and that any valid, sitting king will be Davidic. A preexisting warning in the Torah says that we could be exiled from the land, so we can’t have a sitting king when we’re in exile. Even when the Davidic promise was made, it was understood that we may not always have control over the land.

(29-02-2016 10:27 AM)morondog Wrote: Um... Alize but you guys must have noticed by now that a king descended from David is not currently ruling you? Right? Doesn't that kinda pour a bit of cold water on the whole 'eternal royal line' promise?

But we do have the Davidic line. I can point to people today who have family traditions that place them in the House of David. We accept these claims as valid until they prove otherwise. We also understand that there are going to be tons of people who are Davidic who don’t even know it.

The Hebrew bible was written as an internal document, intended for a Jewish audience. There are some cultural and religious expectations that the writers assume that readers have.

We haven’t had a sitting Davidic King for 2,500 years, and at no time did the Jews say, “Hey wait a minute….” The promise isn’t that there will be a sitting king on the throne at any given time. It’s that the line will exist and that any valid, sitting king will be Davidic. A preexisting warning in the Torah says that we could be exiled from the land, so we can’t have a sitting king when we’re in exile. Even when the Davidic promise was made, it was understood that we may not always have control over the land.

Aliza I bought the 2 volume series book : let's get biblical , why Jews don't accept the Christian messiah by rabbi tovia singer. Thanks to you , my interest of studying the Jews perspective of the messiah appears. The subject is super interesting even from my atheist point of view. I like to learn about all religions. And I admit , my knowledge of Judaism is very poor. I like to thank you !

Religion is bullshit. The winner of the last person to post wins thread.

(29-02-2016 10:54 AM)Aliza Wrote: But we do have the Davidic line. I can point to people today who have family traditions that place them in the House of David. We accept these claims as valid until they prove otherwise. We also understand that there are going to be tons of people who are Davidic who don’t even know it.

The Hebrew bible was written as an internal document, intended for a Jewish audience. There are some cultural and religious expectations that the writers assume that readers have.

We haven’t had a sitting Davidic King for 2,500 years, and at no time did the Jews say, “Hey wait a minute….” The promise isn’t that there will be a sitting king on the throne at any given time. It’s that the line will exist and that any valid, sitting king will be Davidic. A preexisting warning in the Torah says that we could be exiled from the land, so we can’t have a sitting king when we’re in exile. Even when the Davidic promise was made, it was understood that we may not always have control over the land.

Aliza I bought the 2 volume series book : let's get biblical , why Jews don't accept the Christian messiah by rabbi tovia singer. Thanks to you , my interest of studying the Jews perspective of the messiah appears. The subject is super interesting even from my atheist point of view. I like to learn about all religions. And I admit , my knowledge of Judaism is very poor. I like to thank you !

I learned everything I know about counter-missionary topics from Rabbi Singer and Rabbi Skobac. You'll find a lot of my arguments in Singer's writings. Enjoy the books! They'll certainly be an eye-opener.

(29-02-2016 12:04 PM)Leo Wrote: Aliza I bought the 2 volume series book : let's get biblical , why Jews don't accept the Christian messiah by rabbi tovia singer. Thanks to you , my interest of studying the Jews perspective of the messiah appears. The subject is super interesting even from my atheist point of view. I like to learn about all religions. And I admit , my knowledge of Judaism is very poor. I like to thank you !

I learned everything I know about counter-missionary topics from Rabbi Singer and Rabbi Skobac. You'll find a lot of my arguments in Singer's writings. Enjoy the books! They'll certainly be an eye-opener.

I started to read the volume 1 book and the info of this awesome book is super gold. With this info is very easy to destroy the pathetic Christian arguments or lies. Rabbi Tovia Singer is a brilliant man. I will check Rabbi Skobac books later.

Religion is bullshit. The winner of the last person to post wins thread.

It’s not that the House of David is so super awesome and special, it’s just that according to the bible –the one that Christians base their faith on- the House of David was promised by G-d to be the royal line forever. This is a fact. The Hebrew Bible does state this rather clearly in several places.

The NT writers understood that if they were going to effectively sell Jesus to the Jews (and that was the original intent), then they’d have to market him as a member of the House of David. Of course, their ignorance shines through in providing two conflicting genealogies, both of which are invalid lines.

The thing about David’s story is not so much that it disqualifies Jesus as being a messianic candidate, but that messages gleaned from his life completely contradicts the message that Christianity is trying to sell. By virtue of the fact that NT writers spent so much time and energy explaining how they believed Jesus was Davidic, and how their concept of Messiah fulfills OT prophecy, we can see that they viewed themselves as being subject to Jewish law.

…And Jewish law discredits all of their arguments.

Ok, thanks Aliza for that explanation. Apparently God has favorites. He thinks that adulterers should be put to death, but he makes an exception for David, his beloved one. How sweet and just is he.

Then, I guess it wouldn't really matter if the Messiah came from Satan. As long as God willed it, that's how it will be.

It’s not that the House of David is so super awesome and special, it’s just that according to the bible –the one that Christians base their faith on- the House of David was promised by G-d to be the royal line forever. This is a fact. The Hebrew Bible does state this rather clearly in several places.

The NT writers understood that if they were going to effectively sell Jesus to the Jews (and that was the original intent), then they’d have to market him as a member of the House of David. Of course, their ignorance shines through in providing two conflicting genealogies, both of which are invalid lines.

The thing about David’s story is not so much that it disqualifies Jesus as being a messianic candidate, but that messages gleaned from his life completely contradicts the message that Christianity is trying to sell. By virtue of the fact that NT writers spent so much time and energy explaining how they believed Jesus was Davidic, and how their concept of Messiah fulfills OT prophecy, we can see that they viewed themselves as being subject to Jewish law.

…And Jewish law discredits all of their arguments.

Ok, thanks Aliza for that explanation. Apparently God has favorites. He thinks that adulterers should be put to death, but he makes an exception for David, his beloved one. How sweet and just is he.

Then, I guess it wouldn't really matter if the Messiah came from Satan. As long as God willed it, that's how it will be.

Did I miss something ?
Is Israel planning on installing a monarchy, and dumping democracy, (again) ?

Actually the change from the Tribal Confederation model, to demanding a king, is considered by some scholars to be the point where ancient Israel loses it's unique identity. The Prophet Amos certainly thought so : Amos 5:2 "Fallen is the virgin Israel, never to rise again, deserted in her own land, with no one to lift her up."

Insufferable know-it-all. It is objectively immoral to kill innocent babies. Please stick to the guilty babies.

(29-02-2016 10:54 AM)Aliza Wrote: But we do have the Davidic line. I can point to people today who have family traditions that place them in the House of David. We accept these claims as valid until they prove otherwise.

Why? Why would you accept an unsupported assertion? It's been thousands of years with huge gaps in documentation.

Quote:We also understand that there are going to be tons of people who are Davidic who don’t even know it.

And there could be absolutely no one. In thousands of years the line may well have died out.

There is no evidence either way.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.

(29-02-2016 10:54 AM)Aliza Wrote: But we do have the Davidic line. I can point to people today who have family traditions that place them in the House of David. We accept these claims as valid until they prove otherwise.

Why? Why would you accept an unsupported assertion? It's been thousands of years with huge gaps in documentation.

Quote:We also understand that there are going to be tons of people who are Davidic who don’t even know it.

And there could be absolutely no one. In thousands of years the line may well have died out.

There is no evidence either way.

If your mother said that your great grandfather was a ship captain, do you challenge her or do you just trust that she knew who her grandfather was?

I accept an unsupported assertion because I trust my heritage and traditions. Also, I know that no one stands to gain anything from being Davidic, so what's the motive for someone to fabricate their history? The people that I know personally are meticulous about maintaining family lines and upholding traditions to a point of neuroticism. They learned that behavior from somewhere. I simply have confidence in my heritage. That's enough for me.

(29-02-2016 06:06 PM)Chas Wrote: Why? Why would you accept an unsupported assertion? It's been thousands of years with huge gaps in documentation.

And there could be absolutely no one. In thousands of years the line may well have died out.

There is no evidence either way.

If your mother said that your great grandfather was a ship captain, do you challenge her or do you just trust that she knew who her grandfather was?

If my mother said that I had an ancestor in 100BCE who was a shoemaker, I don't trust that she knows that.

Quote:I accept an unsupported assertion because I trust my heritage and traditions.

That is faith, not reason.

Quote:Also, I know that no one stands to gain anything from being Davidic, so what's the motive for someone to fabricate their history?

Pride?

Quote:The people that I know personally are meticulous about maintaining family lines and upholding traditions to a point of neuroticism. They learned that behavior from somewhere. I simply have confidence in my heritage. That's enough for me.

Your confidence is unsupported by anything other than wishful thinking.

Quote:I understand and fully respect that that's not enough for you.

No, it isn't.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.